Currently Im lifted more than I want to be King 2.5” shocks on all four corners and very heavy Dobinson C59-549 rear coils. What coil spring would you recommend? I have a 12.5gallon LRA tank and ARB drawers in the rear with maybe 80lbs of tools in the drawers. Currently the rear wheel arches are at 40” from the ground.
Help With Rear Spring Selection
- Thread starter Allofthebacon
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Go to a CAT scale at a truck stop like Loves and get your front, rear, and total weight. I can give you good recommendations from there, but otherwise we’re just guessing
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2013
- Threads
- 236
- Messages
- 2,160
And run this query through ChatGPT with the scale numbers. And ask the guys at Slee or Cruiser Outfitters, from whom you should buying this stuff. That will get you well sorted. Having said all that, it's still an imprecise and subjective gambit, in my experience. That's why car manufacturers spend so much time dialing in suspension feel. We can't hope to be so successful or precise with all we expect of these vehicles and all the variables/mods we throw at them. Just my two cents.
Yep, truthfully Slee or Cruiser Outfitters or Filthy will have more experience than most of us, but either way having actual weights should help with the optimization. My gut says if the rear wheel wells are 40” then there’s too much spring right now but it’s a bit of a guess without the actual data
How does it ride currently? It looks great the way it is, but you are pry oversprung for your weight.
The 549's are showing a 2" rear lift with 1100+ pounds added.
Id look at the Dobinson 535's, 545's, or even the 547's depending on weight.
Im leaning 547's when my kings go on, but ive got a little more weight on the rear of my 200
The 549's are showing a 2" rear lift with 1100+ pounds added.
Id look at the Dobinson 535's, 545's, or even the 547's depending on weight.
Im leaning 547's when my kings go on, but ive got a little more weight on the rear of my 200
- Thread starter
- #6
That's a great idea, I'll need to see if I have one nearby, Thanks!
- Thread starter
- #7
Honestly it rides great, before I had the Dobinson C59-559V variable springs and I felt like it was way too floaty with more body roll than I like.
FWIW I found springs on the stiffer side are better than those on the softer side. My rears are rated 880-1100 (vs my old 220-880# ones) and my rear static load was about 650# but it’s still a comfortable bounce going over gradual speed bumps, though with heavier springs it’s now a single rebound vs a double bounce. But you seem to have more height in your setup than I do on 35s so you might have too much?
DesmoPilot
SILVER Star
Exactly my experience as well. I have around 800-900lbs static and the rear was too soft with the 547 springs. Even through the fender to hub measurement at 23" was pretty ideal, the vehicle just felt too soft in the rear when going over bumps, etc. I swapped to 549s a couple of weeks ago and so much better. Feels supported now.
@Allofthebacon I am in AZ as well if you want to compare springs, ride, etc.
- Thread starter
- #10
So final verdict those Dobinsons C59-549 rear springs where just too much. They settled zero, staying exactly the same measurements at 500miles. 25” hub to fender. I loved the feel of the springs on bumps but I could feel the lack of pressure on turns. Off-road they did well, took them down the Devil’s Staircase without issue. But they were just too damn high!
I installed new C59-539 springs which instantly dropped the rear down to 23” hub to fender (roughly 38” from ground to fender). The 539s are much tighter on corners and feel more planted than the 549s. They are firmer than the 559V springs but not near as firm as the 549s. If Dobinsons would make a shorter version of the 549 I’d go for it, but for now the 539s seem like the sweet spot.
I installed new C59-539 springs which instantly dropped the rear down to 23” hub to fender (roughly 38” from ground to fender). The 539s are much tighter on corners and feel more planted than the 549s. They are firmer than the 559V springs but not near as firm as the 549s. If Dobinsons would make a shorter version of the 549 I’d go for it, but for now the 539s seem like the sweet spot.
I'm guessing you meant C59-535* springs? I'm interested in potentially trying out Dobinson springs myself (535 or 559V), and have been following this thread.
I currently have OME 2721's, previously had 2722's. Truck weights 3300lbs over the front axle (ARB bumper, no winch), 3020lbs over the rear (ARB drawers), total 6320lbs. With a growing family, we're using camper trailers more, so I swapped to 2721's because of the higher 350lb/in spring rate of the progressive spring, but the rear end dropped a whole inch from where it was with 2722's resulting in a "nose up" configuration. Trailer tongue weight is about 500-600lbs. Goal is a truck that is more or less level with +500lbs of tongue weight or cargo while also still being comfortable without a trailer.
I love how comfortable the progressive 2721's are, but I think the short overall height of the spring (430mm/440mm) leaves me wanting a taller spring. I saw the progressive Icon's, but heard they don't do very well with load, and then I came across the C59-559V but Dobinson doesn't provide a direct spring rate measurement. @Allofthebacon when you had 559V's did you ever happen to load the rear with a trailer or 500lbs of equipment...?
Open for any recommendations - I've thought about doing airbags but I prefer just not having to deal with "another thing" and I want to try new springs first since my 2722's were so saggy.
IMO, we often use far too much spring rate for builds.
The hard part is finding a perfect spring that has the right balance of spring rate, free length / ride height for a particular build weight. We often conflate or compromise by using spring rate to address the later.
It gets more complicated with the damper. Where low speed damper tuning should be used for body control, spring rate again is often used to compensate for too little low speed damping.
Using spring rate trades ride quality and articulation which are significant compromises. A high performing off-roader will use more tender spring rates. HD load bearing trucks are not exactly known to be good off-road.
IMO, find the right spring rate first for the desired ride quality and load handling. Ride height should be adjusted by finding a spring with the same rate but longer free length. There's an unnecessary trepidation to using spring spacers and they are very legitimate to dialing in ride height for a better overall performing rig.
Chasing more spring rate for ride height or body control often creates a bad tuning situation where too little damping is used to compensate for bad ride quality. Ride quality is dictated by spring rate first, and the damper is then adjusted to manage body control. There's a sweet spot to correct damping that needs to be matched with spring rate so just because a damper has a wide range of adjustment, doesn't mean ride quality can come for free with less damper force.
The hard part is finding a perfect spring that has the right balance of spring rate, free length / ride height for a particular build weight. We often conflate or compromise by using spring rate to address the later.
It gets more complicated with the damper. Where low speed damper tuning should be used for body control, spring rate again is often used to compensate for too little low speed damping.
Using spring rate trades ride quality and articulation which are significant compromises. A high performing off-roader will use more tender spring rates. HD load bearing trucks are not exactly known to be good off-road.
IMO, find the right spring rate first for the desired ride quality and load handling. Ride height should be adjusted by finding a spring with the same rate but longer free length. There's an unnecessary trepidation to using spring spacers and they are very legitimate to dialing in ride height for a better overall performing rig.
Chasing more spring rate for ride height or body control often creates a bad tuning situation where too little damping is used to compensate for bad ride quality. Ride quality is dictated by spring rate first, and the damper is then adjusted to manage body control. There's a sweet spot to correct damping that needs to be matched with spring rate so just because a damper has a wide range of adjustment, doesn't mean ride quality can come for free with less damper force.
I agree with you in that spring length is equally important to spring rate and often overlooked.
With that being said, I think that OME does not offer long enough springs and I have ruled out using 2723's because that balance is biased too far into spring rate over length. I think going with C535's from Dobinson's or one of the Ironman's springs that have 470-490mm of free height versus OME's 430/440 while maintaining a softer 270lb spring rate will suffice when combined with a firmer valved shock.
With that being said, I think that OME does not offer long enough springs and I have ruled out using 2723's because that balance is biased too far into spring rate over length. I think going with C535's from Dobinson's or one of the Ironman's springs that have 470-490mm of free height versus OME's 430/440 while maintaining a softer 270lb spring rate will suffice when combined with a firmer valved shock.
If you need an extra inch in the rear, just add some ONE trim packers
Were you the one that had 25-30mm trim packers from an 80 series on the rear of the 200? i totally forgot about trim packers as a solution last night and ended up ordering TOY064B ironman springs… might be one of those things where i want to try both out since the variable weight 350 is real nice to have.
I have a 10mm trim packer on one side for leveling. Not sure the sku but it fits the 200 coil just fine. You can add a couple to both sides if you need an extra inch or so of rear lift
2HundyJTex
SILVER Star
@linuxgod are you talking about OEM spacer, rear spring (1x): PN 48373-60010? I’ve been thinking along these lines as well, just couldn’t find a spacer that is “documented” to fit 2008+ LCs.
I used this one. Yes it says it’s for the 100 series but the spring size is apparently the same. I’ve had one on the passengers side rear for 50k miles
OME 10mm Packer - Rear - '91-07 Land Cruiser - Slee Off Road
OME 10mm Packer - Rear - '91-07 Land Cruiser
sleeoffroad.com